%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : SYN044+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v2.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n020.cluster.edu
% Model : x86_64 x86_64
% CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 2.10GHz
% Memory : 8046.5625MB
% OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% CPULimit : 300s
% WCLimit : 300s
% DateTime : Thu Sep 24 03:22:32 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.12s 0.42s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.12s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 7
% Number of leaves : 4
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 19 ( 4 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 42 ( 0 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 4 ( 2 avg)
% Number of connectives : 37 ( 14 ~; 15 |; 3 &)
% ( 2 <=>; 3 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 4 ( 3 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 0 ( 0 avg)
% Number of predicates : 4 ( 3 usr; 4 prp; 0-0 aty)
% Number of functors : 0 ( 0 usr; 0 con; --- aty)
% Number of variables : 0 ( 0 sgn 0 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(pel10,conjecture,
( p
<=> q ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',pel10) ).
fof(pel10_2,axiom,
( r
=> ( q
& p ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',pel10_2) ).
fof(pel10_1,axiom,
( q
=> r ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',pel10_1) ).
fof(pel10_3,axiom,
( p
=> ( r
| q ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',pel10_3) ).
fof(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
~ ( p
<=> q ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[pel10]) ).
fof(c_0_5,plain,
( ( ~ r
| q )
& ( ~ r
| p ) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[pel10_2])])]) ).
fof(c_0_6,plain,
( r
| ~ q ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[pel10_1])]) ).
fof(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
( ( q
| p )
& ( ~ q
| ~ p ) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_4])]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
( ~ r
| p ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
( ~ q
| r ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
( q
| p ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
fof(c_0_11,plain,
( r
| q
| ~ p ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[pel10_3])]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
( ~ q
| ~ p ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,plain,
p,
inference(csr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_9]),c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,plain,
( ~ p
| r
| q ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,negated_conjecture,
~ q,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_13])]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,plain,
( ~ r
| q ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,plain,
r,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_13])]),c_0_15]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,plain,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_17])]),c_0_15]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : SYN044+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v2.0.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.12/0.37 % Computer : n020.cluster.edu
% 0.12/0.37 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.12/0.37 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.12/0.37 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.12/0.37 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.12/0.37 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.12/0.37 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.12/0.37 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 10:41:04 UTC 2026
% 0.12/0.37 % CPUTime :
% 0.12/0.37 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.12/0.41 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.12/0.41 Running: /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/eprover --delete-bad-limit=2000000000 --definitional-cnf=24 -s --print-statistics -R --print-version --proof-object --auto-schedule=8 --cpu-limit=300 /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.12/0.42 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.12/0.42 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSLSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.12/0.42 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.12/0.42 % Starting SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.12/0.42 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.42 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.42 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.42 % new_bool_3 with pid 2712097 completed with status 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.12/0.42 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSLSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.12/0.42 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.12/0.42 % Starting SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.12/0.42 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.42 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.12/0.42 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.12/0.42 % Search class: FGHNF-FFSF00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.12/0.42 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.12/0.42 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.42 % SubtermCWHack with pid 2712102 completed with status 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.12/0.42 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSLSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.12/0.42 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.12/0.42 % Starting SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.12/0.42 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.42 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.12/0.42 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.12/0.42 % Search class: FGHNF-FFSF00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.12/0.42 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.12/0.42 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.42 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.12/0.42
% 0.12/0.42 % Proof found!
% 0.12/0.42 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.12/0.42 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.12/0.42 % Parsed axioms : 4
% 0.12/0.42 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Initial clauses : 6
% 0.12/0.42 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Initial clauses in saturation : 6
% 0.12/0.42 % Processed clauses : 8
% 0.12/0.42 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % ...subsumed : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % ...remaining for further processing : 8
% 0.12/0.42 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Backward-subsumed : 2
% 0.12/0.42 % Backward-rewritten : 3
% 0.12/0.42 % Generated clauses : 3
% 0.12/0.42 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 2
% 0.12/0.42 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 1
% 0.12/0.42 % Paramodulations : 3
% 0.12/0.42 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % NegExts : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Total rewrite steps : 4
% 0.12/0.42 % ...of those cached : 2
% 0.12/0.42 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.12/0.42 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.12/0.42 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.12/0.42 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.12/0.42 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.12/0.42 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.12/0.42 % Current number of processed clauses : 3
% 0.12/0.42 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 2
% 0.12/0.42 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Negative unit clauses : 1
% 0.12/0.42 % Non-unit-clauses : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 0
% 0.12/0.42 % ...number of literals in the above : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Current number of archived clauses : 5
% 0.12/0.42 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 1
% 0.12/0.42 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1
% 0.12/0.42 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 1
% 0.12/0.42 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 2
% 0.12/0.42 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % BW rewrite match attempts : 2
% 0.12/0.42 % BW rewrite match successes : 2
% 0.12/0.42 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Termbank termtop insertions : 227
% 0.12/0.42 % Search garbage collected termcells : 22
% 0.12/0.42
% 0.12/0.42 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.12/0.42 % User time : 0.002 s
% 0.12/0.42 % System time : 0.002 s
% 0.12/0.42 % Total time : 0.004 s
% 0.12/0.42 % Maximum resident set size: 3620 pages
% 0.12/0.42
% 0.12/0.42 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.12/0.42 % User time : 0.004 s
% 0.12/0.42 % System time : 0.006 s
% 0.12/0.42 % Total time : 0.010 s
% 0.12/0.42 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.12/0.42 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------